Oil takeover still reverberates in Iran. As western
companies jockey to re-enter Iran, Guy Dinmore examines the legacy of
the 1951 oil industry nationalisation. Mar 20, 2001.
By GUY DINMORE

Half a century ago, Iran nationalised its oil industry and
expelled the British workers of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company,
defining moments in the long power struggle between nationalists,
monarchists and clerics.

For the world's oil giants now negotiating their return to Iran,
the painful lesson of 1951 is a reminder of the nationalist-driven
suspicion that still surrounds their presence and seems to be holding
up big contracts.

Iran marked the 50th anniversary yesterday with a public holiday,
as it has each year since the 1979 Islamic revolution. But it
appeared an occasion the conservative clerical establishment would
prefer to consign to history.

Over the past week the hardline-controlled judiciary has cracked
down on Iran's "religious-nationalists", activists who trace their
political heritage to Mohammad Mossadeq, the hero of oil
nationalisation.

Ali Akbar Moinfar, Iran's first oil minister after the revolution
who is closely associated with the religious-nationalists, sees the
arrests as part of a campaign by the conservatives to undermine the
pro-reform movement of President Mohammad Khatami ahead of the June 8
presidential election.

Reformists say the arrests have again put Mr Khatami in a
difficult position. Either he can remain silent, as he has done so
far, and risk losing supporters critical of his inaction, or he can
oppose the arrests and risk confrontation with his powerful
opponents.

Mr Moinfar, who is 72, denounced the arrests, noting that some of
those imprisoned spent years in jail under the shah, and played
important roles in the revolution. He fears "confessions" of a plot
to overthrow the regime are being extorted from the prisoners.

This new development in the anti-reform backlash is believed to
have the support of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader. In
a speech last month, he attacked the "enemies" of the Islamic
Republic, a reference to the US and Israel and groups they support.
But he also targeted those who sought the "legal toppling" of the
system, words the judiciary seems to have taken as the green light
for its latest moves.

Doran-e-Emruz, one of four dailies that survived a crackdown on
the pro-reform media, ran an outspoken editorial on Sunday that
shocked even its most enthusiastic readers.

The newspaper drew a comparison between the current campaign
against nationalists and the struggle between the shah and Mr
Mossadeq that led to his overthrow in a coup backed by the US and
Britain in 1953.

"It's an important lesson for all political forces today," the
newspaper said. "The defeat of the nationalist movement (in 1953) was
apparently a victory for the monarchy, but it destroyed the chance of
reforming the monarchist system within public opinion, and this made
the revolution and the overthrow of the monarchy legitimate."

The daily also ran two pages of interviews with
religious-nationalists. One commentator lauded Mr Mossadeq and
criticised those who wanted to erase that period from the nation's
historical memory. For the judiciary it was too much. Doran-e-Emruz
had crossed Iran's "red lines" - issues that should remain unspoken
and it was closed later that day, along with three pro-reform
periodicals.

How much public support the religious-nationalists enjoy is not
clear. Most of their candidates for parliamentary elections a year
ago were barred from running by the conservative-dominated Council of
Guardians. But a few slipped through and made it into the Majlis. The
nationalists, who support a religious state but dispute the absolute
power of the clergy, claim a large following among the middle class,
intellectuals and students.

The prevailing political uncertainty has spilled over into the
world of oil. Parliament, dominated by reformists since last year,
has questioned contracts signed since 1995 with western oil
companies. Delegates have demanded that the terms of the "buy-backs",
where developers are paid in oil, be made public, while hinting at
corruption.

Such pressures have apparently held up the signing of contracts.
As a result, Iran, with its ageing oil fields, risks missing its
ambitious production targets.